Here's the translation:
Is Counterpicking Strong?
Isn't it true that the more balanced a game is, the stronger counterpicking is? I'm not so confident that this is true anymore. As long as no one character is way ahead of the others, players usually have one pocket character as a secondary (I am also one of these people). USF4 is overflowing with Evil Ryu and Elena, but I think the character that is easy to use, strong, and good for a pocket in Smash 4 is (atm) Meta Knight. He has many good matchups and is not hard to use. If it were the previous patch, characters like Luigi. If you use her well, Rosalina is good too.
However, the popular idea that "having secondaries is strong" is obscuring the disadvantages of using secondaries, so I, as a user of multiple characters, will write about my thoughts the pros and cons of doing so.
Pros
You can fight advantageous or well-practiced matchups
Obviously, since you are counterpicking, you can force your preferred matchup against a solo-main. This is the #1 pro of secondaries. I think the most popular usage is to use secondaries to cover your main's bad matchups.
It becomes harder to prepare against you
This is simply because the more characters an opponent has, the more you have to prepare against. This is only a real advantage when all of your characters are strong.
It's fun to use many characters
Well, it's a game, so of course it's more fun if you can use many characters.
You can avoid the ditto
I think that there are many people that dislike dittos (I am one of these people too). By using a secondary, you can avoid the ditto.
You can get better at the game in general (maybe)
When only using one character, you tend to only get better at that character, not the game. I think that people that are really good a one character but become very bad when using any other are either clumsy or bad at the game.
Cons
You become weak to counterpicks and double-blind picks
Secondaries are usually only trained towards doing certain matchups, so if you get counterpicked on your secondary you are at a large matchup experience disadvantage. In addition, if two multi-character players face-off, there will certainly be a double-blink pick first game. It means that you can't only train secondaries for counterpicking, but also for being counterpicked against.
You need more practice time than solo-mains
In order to cover the first con, you need to train your secondaries as if they were your main. However, time is limited, and you need twice the training time (main+secondary) compared to a solo-main (even more if your two characters control differently). If you spend the same time training as a solo-main, of course the quality of your characters will be lower than theirs. Spending a lot more time training is the only solution that would solve the first con, so you are forced to accept either the first con or this one.
"Easy" counterpicks do not exist
If you are counterpicking, that means you think that you gain a matchup advantage doing so. It means that from your opponent's standpoint it's a disadvantageous matchup, and the first matchup that they will try to train themselves in. If you counterpick just because it's an advantageous matchup and without properly training yourself, your supposedly disadvantaged opponent will rather be at an advantage.
You don't have a main to rely on in a pinch
This is another comparison to solo-mains, but solo-mains only use one character. No matter who the opponent is, they do not waver. However, since multi-character players use various characters, there times when they don't know who to choose (especially when none of the characters have a clear advantage against the opponent). You are at a mental disadvantage at the character select screen. Although you might end up choosing the character that the opponent seems to dislike the most, it's clear that in the long run this is not a reliable strategy.
It's not hype
Generally, the crowd does not want to watch the character with the advantage winning. The crowd wants the disadvantaged character somehow beat the advantaged one, so even if your counterpick works as planned and you win, it's not hype. In comparison, it is cool and hype when a solo-main overcomes a disadvantageous matchup.
Conclusion
What do you think? Don't you think that the cons seem to be larger than the pros? By the way, my opinion as a player who has used multiple characters and continues to use multiple characters is that Being a solo-main is better. (Of course, you have to main a character that is fairly strong) I think that there are many people that split up their time practicing multiple characters when you improve much faster as a solo-main. I think that it is best for people that can't seem to do well at tournaments to limit themselves to one good character. If you want to add a character, I think that you should play that character only, extensively, for a certain period of time.
In Brawl, I used Olimar, Falco, and Wario, but I couldn't choose who to use against Meta Knight and switched it around depending on the opponent or how I felt before the match. In the end, I used Wario the most, and relied on him the most. For now, (as long as there aren't nerfs,) I want to use Meta Knight only in as many matchups as possible.
I only thought of this while writing this but I can't understand players in Melee that use Sheik against Fox but use Fox against Sheik
